Jump to content
The Political Lounge

AMPU Benchmarks


vcczar

Recommended Posts

@MrPotatoTed @jvikings1 @DakotaHale @Cal @Hestia @Rodja @Rezi @ConservativeElector2 and anyone else.

While it won't affect this playthrough, I've created Era Benchmarks. This is just to increase tension and add flavor to each historical. Basically, the sole party that has accomplished their benchmark when the era ends, gains points and the other loses points. If both parties accomplish their benchmark, then no one scores points. Originally, I was going to have anywhere from 5 to 10 benchmarks per era; however, I thought that would force the game too much. Therefore, I'll just have 1 central issue per party. In games involving many human players, these could be used as bargaining chips. "I'll support bimetalism, if you vote for the Civil Rights bill." In this case, Red is willing to take a benchmark hit to get a boost of support that might win them reelection. Here are the benchmarks.

  1. Era of Independence - no benchmarks because there's no strong central government, parties are nebulous, and the goals are too shared at the moment. 
  2. Era of Federalism - Red wants to establish the US Bank; Blue wants to add TN and KY as new states. Obviously, the other party wants to stop the other from being the case. One issue for Red here is that voting against TN or KY statehood can hurt their support there once they become states. If Red has a big lead, they might just allow the statehood and just neutralize any point gain by Blue by getting the Bank established. 
  3. Era of Republicanism - Red just needs to avoid War with the UK, which puts Blue in a bind. Blue just needs to embargo the UK, which may lead to war. Overall, Blue might force war whether they want it or not. They're also in a bind if relations with the UK are good, which means Red will likely get points. Blue may have to use a lot of their power to antagonize the UK. 
  4. Era of Democracy - A simple Bank War. Red wants to make sure the US Bank is active throughout this era. Blue wants to kill the US Bank. 
  5. Era of Manifest Destiny - This will be a common war but it will be emphasized here. Red was to simply raise the tariff higher than it had been in the previous era and Blue wants it to be lower. 
  6. Era of Nationalism - Two difficult goals here--would be made "easier" by a Civil War. Red wants to abolish slavery and Blue wants to acquire Cuba, which would come in friendly to the South (and as a slave state if it is still legal). 
  7. Era of the Gilded Age - This was a massive fight at the time that may seem odd by today's standard. Red party wants the Gold Standard. Blue party wants Bimetalism. 
  8. Era of Progressivism - Red wants to acquire Hawaii for their imperialist aims. Blue just wants Banking Reform. 
  9. Era of Normalcy - Red wants to restrict immigration. Blue just needs to pass an agriculture bill. 
  10. Era of Ideologies - Red goes back to just wanting to raise the tariff. Blue wants to pass Social Security.
  11. Era of the Nuclear Age - Red wants to weaken labor unions. Blue wants to pass both Medicare and Medicaid.
  12. Era of Neocons - Red simply needs to deregulate or repeal regulations. Blue simply needs to raise the minimum wage.
  13. Era of Terror - Red needs to simply lower the top tax rate; Blue needs to pass Federal Healthcare
  14. Era of Populism - Red need to have 2x as many justices on the Supreme Court. This would force Merrick Garlanding. Blue needs to improve the Planet's Health, likely through something like a Green New Deal. Both benchmarks are difficult. 
  15. Era of the Future - This has no benchmarks because party direction will be totally at the control of the players. Democrats could become anti-science and the GOP might become the comforters of the poor and ill. 
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, vcczar said:

@MrPotatoTed @jvikings1 @DakotaHale @Cal @Hestia @Rodja @Rezi @ConservativeElector2 and anyone else.

While it won't affect this playthrough, I've created Era Benchmarks. This is just to increase tension and add flavor to each historical. Basically, the sole party that has accomplished their benchmark when the era ends, gains points and the other loses points. If both parties accomplish their benchmark, then no one scores points. Originally, I was going to have anywhere from 5 to 10 benchmarks per era; however, I thought that would force the game too much. Therefore, I'll just have 1 central issue per party. In games involving many human players, these could be used as bargaining chips. "I'll support bimetalism, if you vote for the Civil Rights bill." In this case, Red is willing to take a benchmark hit to get a boost of support that might win them reelection. Here are the benchmarks.

  1. Era of Independence - no benchmarks because there's no strong central government, parties are nebulous, and the goals are too shared at the moment. 
  2. Era of Federalism - Red wants to establish the US Bank; Blue wants to add TN and KY as new states. Obviously, the other party wants to stop the other from being the case. One issue for Red here is that voting against TN or KY statehood can hurt their support there once they become states. If Red has a big lead, they might just allow the statehood and just neutralize any point gain by Blue by getting the Bank established. 
  3. Era of Republicanism - Red just needs to avoid War with the UK, which puts Blue in a bind. Blue just needs to embargo the UK, which may lead to war. Overall, Blue might force war whether they want it or not. They're also in a bind if relations with the UK are good, which means Red will likely get points. Blue may have to use a lot of their power to antagonize the UK. 
  4. Era of Democracy - A simple Bank War. Red wants to make sure the US Bank is active throughout this era. Blue wants to kill the US Bank. 
  5. Era of Manifest Destiny - This will be a common war but it will be emphasized here. Red was to simply raise the tariff higher than it had been in the previous era and Blue wants it to be lower. 
  6. Era of Nationalism - Two difficult goals here--would be made "easier" by a Civil War. Red wants to abolish slavery and Blue wants to acquire Cuba, which would come in friendly to the South (and as a slave state if it is still legal). 
  7. Era of the Gilded Age - This was a massive fight at the time that may seem odd by today's standard. Red party wants the Gold Standard. Blue party wants Bimetalism. 
  8. Era of Progressivism - Red wants to acquire Hawaii for their imperialist aims. Blue just wants Banking Reform. 
  9. Era of Normalcy - Red wants to restrict immigration. Blue just needs to pass an agriculture bill. 
  10. Era of Ideologies - Red goes back to just wanting to raise the tariff. Blue wants to pass Social Security.
  11. Era of the Nuclear Age - Red wants to weaken labor unions. Blue wants to pass both Medicare and Medicaid.
  12. Era of Neocons - Red simply needs to deregulate or repeal regulations. Blue simply needs to raise the minimum wage.
  13. Era of Terror - Red needs to simply lower the top tax rate; Blue needs to pass Federal Healthcare
  14. Era of Populism - Red need to have 2x as many justices on the Supreme Court. This would force Merrick Garlanding. Blue needs to improve the Planet's Health, likely through something like a Green New Deal. Both benchmarks are difficult. 
  15. Era of the Future - This has no benchmarks because party direction will be totally at the control of the players. Democrats could become anti-science and the GOP might become the comforters of the poor and ill. 

I can implement into the current playthrough, if this is added to the rules.  Just need to know how many points, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrPotatoTed said:

I can implement into the current playthrough, if this is added to the rules.  Just need to know how many points, etc.

It's in the "End of Term" section of the rules. It's 1,000 pts gained (250 per faction) if accomplished, and gives -1,000 pts (-250 per faction) to the party that doesn't achieve it. If they both accomplish it. No points. If neither accomplishes it, then only the party leader factions lose -250 each. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, vcczar said:

It's in the "End of Term" section of the rules. It's 1,000 pts gained (250 per faction) if accomplished, and gives -1,000 pts (-250 per faction) to the party that doesn't achieve it. If they both accomplish it. No points. If neither accomplishes it, then only the party leader factions lose -250 each. 

Wait...how's that math working out?  Haha.  There's five factions per team, not four.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Wait...how's that math working out?  Haha.  There's five factions per team, not four.

Oh yeah. For some reason I thought it was 8 factions each. I'll change it. 

6 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Point values feel low to me on that...barely worth chasing over the course of an entire era, and certainly not worth giving up anything of value to get it.  

Might be the case. I'm still trying to gauge what is a lot of points and what isn't a lot of points in this playthrough. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Oh yeah. For some reason I thought it was 8 factions each. I'll change it. 

Might be the case. I'm still trying to gauge what is a lot of points and what isn't a lot of points in this playthrough. 

Sounds good.  Biggest gain I've seen is what will happen if the Secretary of Defense's proposal goes through as it seems like it will in this current legislative session.  @jvikings1 was Secretary of Defense, suggested the President Calls Up Militia act.  Then had his own politician propose it.  That's worth something like 4x the usual points, plus as Military Industrial Complex he was already set to get a nice chunk of points before he quadrupled it with that play.  Looks like he'll get about 2,250 points from that one law.  Most laws are only worth a couple hundred points in either direction, or less.  ;c)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Sounds good.  Biggest gain I've seen is what will happen if the Secretary of Defense's proposal goes through as it seems like it will in this current legislative session.  @jvikings1 was Secretary of Defense, suggested the President Calls Up Militia act.  Then had his own politician propose it.  That's worth something like 4x the usual points, plus as Military Industrial Complex he was already set to get a nice chunk of points before he quadrupled it with that play.  Looks like he'll get about 2,250 points from that one law.  Most laws are only worth a couple hundred points in either direction, or less.  ;c)

Ok, maybe I'll make it 1,000 per faction? Since it also means -1,000 per faction for the other party--that creates a 10,000 gap party gap, I think.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...